The Lincoln Squirrel – News, features and photos from Lincoln, Mass.

My Turn: Don’t post signs in front of other people’s houses

By Mark Robidoux

This office has received multiple questions and concerns from residents that signs are being installed on the town-owned easement in front of private residences without the resident’s permission or town permission.

As a friendly reminder, 16.4 of the local zoning ordinance states signs on town-owned property need approval from the Select Board and a permit from the Building Inspector.

You are welcome to install political signs on your own property or at the following intersections: Sandy Pond and Lincoln Road, Ballfield Road and Lincoln Road, Lincoln Poad and South Great Road, Bedford Road and Morningside Lane, and Codman Road and Concord Road.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation on this very important matter. Please reach out to me with any questions or concerns on the sign bylaw.

Sincerely,

Mark Robidoux, Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer
781-259-2613, robidouxm@lincolntown.org

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Draft of HCA design guidelines released

Editor’s note: This article was amended on February 29 to include a link to remarks accompanying some of the slides.

New buildings that go up in the future HCA subdistricts will have to adhere to design guidelines presented as a draft at a February 27 community forum.

The slide decks from the forum (one with notes and one without) recap the feedback received by the Housing Choice Act Working Group — feedback that has shifted over time between a preference for concentrating affordable housing at the mall vs. spreading it around town — plus resulting changes that HCAWG and the Planning Board made, and answers to some questions. (Remarks by Select Board and Housing Choice Act Working Group member Jennifer Glass in some of the slides in the deck without notes are truncated but can be accessed here.)

The guidelines beginning on page 8 of the two slide decks aim to “ensure new buildings are in keeping with the scale and character appropriate for a village center and support the high quality of design and connection to the outdoors that Lincoln values.” The slides include pictures of various types of building designs that would be acceptable and lay out guidelines with an emphasis on:

  • Open space
  • Front setbacks
  • Enhancing connectivity through sidewalks and paths
  • Minimizing the visual impact of parking
  • Thoughtful landscaping with native and drought-tolerant plants whenever possible

The required site plan review for each project will continue to include minimizing impact on trees as well as imposing controls on storm water management, lighting, and hardscape. Building guidelines also call for articulated facades and use of half stories and stepbacks to break up massing. All new developments should include accessible public space such as restaurant seating, public gathering space, and street furniture.

For mixed-use buildings:

  • Sidewalks and outdoor space adjacent to buildings should be designed to accommodate outdoor seating and gathering areas that complement the commercial space within the building.
  • Front setback areas should be designed either as a public visual amenity or accessible public space.

Other guidelines in the draft:

  • Public directional signage should follow current town signage design
  • Outdoor displays must be approved by the Planning Board
  • Bicycle racks are required
  • Sustainability is required through the town’s Specialized Stretch Code and Ten Town Pilot Program.
Upcoming meetings:
  • Rural Land Foundation forum outlining latest thoughts about redevelopment of the mall via Zoom — Thursday, Feb. 29 at 7 p.m.
  • Town Meeting preview forum on Housing Choice Act — Thursday, March 14 from 7–8:30 p.m. (details TBA)
  • Planning Board meeting to review and approve design guidelines to submit to Town Meeting — Tuesday, March 19 at 7 p.m. (Zoom only)
  • Annual Town Meeting — Saturday, March 23 starting at 9:30 a.m. in Donaldson Auditorium

Town candidate forum slated for March 12

The Lincoln PTO will host a town election candidate forum on Tuesday, March 12 from 7–9 p.m. in the Lincoln School Learning Commons. It will also be accessible via this Zoom link.

Candidates will have three minutes to introduce themselves and present a substantive statement of their platform. Moderators Rob Stringer and Sarah Cannon Holden will then direct questions to candidates that were submitted on cards filled out by attendees shortly after they arrived, or that are posed via the chat function on Zoom. Candidates will have two minutes to respond. The LPTO can’t guarantee that there will be enough time to get to all the questions.

The forum is intended not as a debate but as an information session and meet-and-greet whereby voters can get acquainted with candidates and their views. Candidates have been asked to refrain from addressing or referring to fellow candidates and to refrain from campaign speeches or speechifying.

The candidates scheduled to participate in the forum are as follows (each seat is for a three-year term):

Select Board:

Planning Board:

Upon arrival, attendees should stop at the LPTO table to fill out a name tag before settling into the Learning Commons. Volunteers will also offer audience members question forms and pencils prior to entering the Learning Commons. Attendees will be invited to join in a collective round of applause for all the candidates at the beginning and end of the Introductions round and are asked to refrain from cheering for anyone candidate during that round.

Planning Board splits 3-2 on endorsing zoning amendments

The multifamily and mixed-use overlay zoning map approved by the Planning Board. Click to enlarge.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with links for the bylaw and accompanying map, and a quote by Trish O’Hagan was removed after she said it was inaccurate.

In a dramatic split echoing the townwide controversy about proposed zoning amendments, the Planning Board voted 3-2 on February 26 to endorse the bylaw they wrote to be presented at the March 23 Annual Town Meeting.

The board’s vote came after members made final tweaks to the bylaw based on Option C, which residents approved at a Special Town Meeting in December 2023. The outline of that option, which has been forwarded to the state for a Housing Choice Act compliance check, would allow multifamily housing clustered in South Lincoln, including over a redeveloped mall. Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives formed to oppose that idea, instead seeking to omit the mall from the HCA rezoning package and spreading permitted affordable housing around other parts of town. 

Board Chair Margaret Olson presented a compilation of HCA feedback they’ve received in recent months. Various residents have advocated for and against things like whether a fourth story should be allowed, limiting or increasing allowed parking, how to best preserve commercial activity, and even whether or not to pass over the measure at Town Meeting altogether and work on a new plan.

Given the divisiveness of the issue, “we are quite prepared to be given new direction if that is what the town would like us to do,” Olson said.

During the public comment period, Deb Howe worried that the amended bylaw didn’t address the notion of an underground or above-ground parking structure which might be needed to accommodate new residents as well as businesses. Ben Shiller argued that it would be very difficult to fit the 100 units of multifamily housing that the Rural Land Foundation has said it needs to sustain the mall’s economic viability.

“There seems to be a lack of analysis around implications of rezoning,” said David Cuetos, adding that the town-commissioned feasibility study for allowing more than the state minimum of affordable units was “badly bungled.”

Susan Hall Mygatt, who at last week’s public hearing suggested passing over the measure, said on Monday that while the board is apparently obligated to advance it to Town Meeting, “you’re not required to sell it or recommend we vote for it.” 

It was clear that a unanimous vote wasn’t going to happen when Ephraim Flint read a statement signed by him and fellow member Lynn DeLisi asking their fellow board members to go back to the drawing board and craft a bylaw with more public input and consensus.

While most residents agree that the town should comply with the HCA while also preserving the town’s character, there is “little agreement on how the rezoning should be done,” the statement said. Additionally, some of those who voted for Option C in December “have said they would have voted differently had they better understood the options and their consequences in more detail.” 

Flint and DeLisi suggested removing the mall subdistrict from the amended bylaw and then creating a committee of members “equal in opposing views” to work with the Planning Board on a compromise solution for other areas to rezone, including the mall. If their fellow board members didn’t go along with these suggestions, they asked that it be “formally stated” at Town Meeting that “two of the five Planning Board members were opposed to bringing this entire package to a vote at this time.”

How best to guide redevelopment of the mall has been a bone of contention along with where in town to allow multifamily housing. The board included the mall in the HCA bylaw revision because the state changed its guidelines last summer so towns could count housing in mixed-use subdistricts as part of its required total. “We took that opportunity because it would reduce the amount of units we would have to zone for elsewhere” in town, Olson said. “All along, we have tried to minimize the compliance footprint.”

“What [the RLF] has shown us to date, I would have liked to have seen a year ago,” DeLisi said. 

“You and me both,” Olson replied.

“We’re looking at zoning changes that are going to change our town for generations. We have to be careful and thoughtful about it and not be pushing too fast,” DeLisi said. “It’ll be a slim margin no matter what. Let’s try to get 80% of people at [a later] Town Meeting to say yeah, let’s vote for this compromise.”

But Olson firmly rejected the idea of the Planning Board not endorsing Article 3 on the Town Meeting warrant or passing it over altogether. “To me as a voter, if I voted for something that gave direction for the board and the board did not do that, I would be absolutely outraged,” she said.

Olson indicated that having the bylaw rejected by residents in March would not necessarily be a wholly negative outcome. “People get anxious when things are voted down at Town Meeting. I’m like, ‘That is information. We will take that information and act on it along the lines you are describing’,” she said. “I feel like we should do our duty as Planning Board members and present Option C as we were directed by Town Meeting, and if Town Meeting tells us ‘We have changed our minds,’ that’s fine… People talk about a silent majority — but we have no idea who’s the majority. We’ll hear from the town.”

“Developers are trying to sell a project that people want to live in, “ Nicholson said. “If you put so many restrictions on things, nothing will happen and that’s been the problem over decades. That’s why we are where we are. At some point you do have to take a little bit of risk and accept that it’s not going to please everyone.”

DeLisi and Flint eventually voted “nay” on the motion to endorse the HCA zoning bylaws as amended that evening, with the other three (Olson, Craig Nicholson, and Gary Taylor) voting “aye.”

My Turn: HCA in Lincoln – managing risks and finding solutions

By Rob Ahlert

When it comes to finding a solution to the Housing Choice Act riddle for Lincoln, there are many paths the town could choose to go down. When choosing which path to go down, an organization (e.g., our town) usually carefully identifies its options and the risks vs rewards for each, ultimately choosing the option which has the lowest risk and the highest reward. The conundrum we face in Lincoln is that the reward for one group (e.g., a lot more housing in one area) is in fact a major risk for the other group (too much housing in one area). So how do we as an organization (Lincoln) move forward to make a decision when we don’t even have the same objectives?

As you probably are suspecting, the right answer is to find a compromise.

OK, but how do we compromise? How do we not end up with a solution that only 51% of the population is satisfied with?

This is where sitting down together and documenting the risks/fears that folks have is critical.  And it will get very touchy because it’s hard not to quickly dismiss someone’s fears when you think you already have the answer. This is where talking, listening and documenting risks becomes critically important. What are the risks? Can we quantify and agree on the likelihood and impact on a 1 to 10 scale for each risk? Are there any obvious mitigations?

During a workshop or series of workshops, each risk can be graded on likelihood (1 to 10) and Impact (1 to 10).  The risk can either be “Accepted,” “Needs More Info,” or “Mitigated” and a workshop participant (or participants) can be assigned to take responsibility for that action. Below are some examples from a list of risks I’ve heard on both sides of the discussion.  

  • Risk #1: Developers put in offers on over 50% of the parcels in the first year after maps are published.
  • Risk #2: Developers will not build family-friendly three-bedroom apartments or condos.
  • Risk #3: Traffic will be bumper to bumper on Lincoln Road from Five Corners to Codman Road, not just during the rush hours but also at other times of the day and on weekends.

These are just three examples. There are likely 50+ unique risks we could document if we had a workshop on this topic.

When faced with a decision that has a lot of risks, does leadership go ahead and choose an option that exposes the organization to potential large downside impacts, especially given that reversing this decision would be over a year away? I would hope not, especially in a consensus-driven organization like a town. This is not a private enterprise with a CEO, this is a town.

So we document a lot of risks/fears from folks on both sides of discussion. What do we do next? Now comes the really hard work. Do we decide to just accept one of these risks because both the likelihood and impact are so low? Are we aware of an immediate mitigation that we can apply that will lower the likelihood or impact? Do we need more information? How much time and money do we need to gather more info or mitigate?

If you’ve read this far, some of you are really rolling your eyes saying this is way too much trouble to go through to get to a solution to the HCA riddle. But that’s the point. By going through this trouble, we better understand risks that each other see and find a consensus solution, choosing a compromise path.

That is what Brookline did, that’s what we can do as well. On March 23rd, vote “No for Now” on the HCA-related article and then we can get to “Yes” together before December 2024 and easily comply.

Calling all leaders and/or project managers/therapists to the table!

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Elect Sarah Postlethwait to Planning Board

By Barbara Peskin

(Editor’s note: Postlethwait is challenging incumbent Gary Taylor for a seat on the Planning Board in the March 25 town election.)

We are so fortunate that Sarah Postlethwait seeks our vote for the Lincoln Planning Board. Sarah is responsive, smart, and a team player. Should you arrive at the Planning Board with an issue for your own property, Sarah will care about your goals, consider them fairly, and work with you and the Planning Board to craft a balanced solution.

For rezoning, future planning and HCA planning, Sarah knows our bylaws and state laws for rezoning inside and out. She researches thoroughly, knowing that the details are key when making decisions that impact our town’s future. Her communication style is clear, thoughtful, and respectful. If I have any bylaw question, especially around a topic I am struggling to understand, I turn to Sarah. She finds a way to explain it so I get it. Sarah also has a great sense of humor.

Sarah understands and prioritizes the financial and environmental impacts of Planning Board decisions on you and on Lincoln. She will work with the Planning Board team, invite input, and give respect to all opinions.

If you want to vote for someone who cares deeply for Lincoln’s legacy while understanding how Planning shapes the future of living, working and raising a family in Lincoln’s present, vote for Sarah Postlethwait.

Meet Sarah at a coffee chat on Wednesday, Feb. 28 from 9-10:30 a.m., at 241 Old Concord Rd., hosted by Joanne and Jack Wise. Drop in for all or part of the time. I think you’ll learn why she wins my vote, and also deserves yours at the polls on March 25.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Police log for February 6–22, 2024

February 6

Hemlock Circle (3:18 p.m.) — A caller reported being the possible victim of a phone scam.

February 7

Nothing of note.

February 8

Donelan’s (6:43 p.m.) — A caller reported losing their wallet earlier in the day at Donelan’s.

Cambridge Turnpike westbound (8:39 p.m.0 — A motorist reported seeing a dog cross Route 2 near the Lincoln/Lexington town line. Massachusetts State Police and Lexington Police were notified.

February 9

The Commons of Lincoln (1:40 a.m.) — An officer arrived on scene after a caller requested assistance.

Tack Room (4:00 a.m.) — An officer checked on a parked and occupied vehicle. The occupant was an employee of the Tack Room.

Lincoln Road (1:01 p.m.) — A minor motor vehicle crash occurred in the parking lot of Donelan’s Supermarket. All police units were committed to other calls. The operators were advised to exchange appropriate information.

Old Winter Street (2:12 p.m.) — A caller reported discovering some items that potentially were suspicious. After speaking with an officer, the items were properly discarded.

Wells Road (4:20 p.m.) — Officers came upon a person possibly in distress. They spoke to the individual, who eventually returned to their home.

Lincoln Road (6:00 p.m.) — A caller reported seeing a small leak coming from a fire hydrant. The Water Department was notified.

Trapelo Road (3:43 p.m.) — An officer checked on an parked and occupied vehicle. The operator was fine and was on their way.

February 11

Wells Road (2:00 p.m.) — A caller asked to speak with an officer.

Windingwood Lane (3:45 p.m.) — Officers responded to a residence regarding a civil matter.

February 12

South Great Road (11:32 a.m.) — A caller reported that the railroad gates at the South Great Road crossing may be malfunctioning. An officer responded to the area and monitored the gates, which appeared to be working properly. While on scene, a representative from Keolis arrived.

Winter Street (11:55 a.m.) — A caller requested assistance getting from Winter Street to the Lincoln train station. An officer provided a courtesy transport.

School Street, Needham (1:01 p.m.) — Needham Police requested assistance in locating an individual.

Stonehedge Road (2:26 p.m.) — A caller asked whether Verizon solicitors were authorized in their neighborhood. Verizon had been granted solicitation permits for several individuals.

Stonehedge Road (3:31 p.m.) — A second call about solicitors was received.

Concord Road (5:28 p.m.) — A two-vehicle crash occurred at the intersection of Concord Road and South Great Road when vehicle had failed to slow and stop for traffic, striking a stopped motor vehicle. There were no injuries reported. Both vehicles were driven from the scene.

Boyce Farm Road (5:52 p.m.) — Another caller asked whether Verizon solicitors were authorized in their neighborhood.

February 13

Nothing of note.

February 14

Weston Road (12:42 a.m.) — The Fire Department responded to a residence for a carbon monoxide alarm. The alarm was determined to be a false alarm resulting from a faulty detector.

Stonegate Gardens (1:08 a.m.) — An officer discovered an unsecured door at Stonegate Gardens. The property was checked; the door may have been improperly secured.

Wells Road (1:08 p.m.) — A caller asked to speak with an officer regarding an ongoing matter.

Old Cambridge Turnpike (2:00 p.m.) — An officer served an individual with court documents.

Huckleberry Hill (5:35 p.m.) — A caller requested a police response for someone knocking on their door. Police determined that the knocking most likely came from solicitors in the area.

Goose Pond Road (7:30 p.m.) — A caller reported seeing individuals walking in the street. The individuals were later determined to be Verizon solicitors.

February 15

Old Sudbury Road (6:32 a.m.) — A motorist reported the railroad gates were stuck in the down position. An officer remained on scene directing traffic for approximately 30 minutes until a Keolis representative arrived on scene.

Winter Street (1:00 p.m.) — A caller reported that the stop sign at Winter Street and Old County Road was missing. The DPW was notified.

Wells Road (1:34 p.m.) — An officer spoke to an individual regarding an on-going incident.

Wells Road (6:34 p.m.) — The Fire Department responded for an alarm activation due to cooking smoke.

Trapelo Road (10:38 p.m.) — A caller called to complain about the Verizon solicitors. The caller was advised to contact the Town Clerk regarding the “Do Not Solicit List.”

February 16

Tower Road (10:04 a.m.) — Police were called to a residence to perform a well-being check.

Lincoln Road (2:17 p.m.) — A caller reported that the railroad gates were stuck in the down position. An officer responded and determined the gates were stuck due to a disabled train. Within minutes, the train was on its way and the gates resumed normal function.

Bypass Road (2:37 p.m.) — A two-vehicle crash was reported on Bypass Road but was found to have occurred over the Concord town line. Concord Police and Fire Departments responded.

Hanscom AFB (4:05 p.m.) — Hanscom Air Force Base Security Forces reported that they had an individual stopped at the gate with an active arrest warrant. Lincoln Police arrived and took into custody Javon Epps, 32, from Rochester, N.H. Mr. Epps was booked and transported to Concord District Court.

South Great Road (9:17 p.m.) — A caller reported that two people exited a vehicle on South Great Road and were arguing. They ultimate re-entered the vehicle and continued on their way. An officer checked the area but was unable to locate the vehicle.

February 17

Old Concord Road (12:17 p.m.) — A caller reported their shed was on fire. The Lincoln Fire Department arrived on scene but most of the fire had been knocked down by the homeowner.

Old Winter Street (3:30 p.m.) — A person brought several items to the police station for destruction.

February 18

Codman Road (2:58 p.m.) — A caller reported a loose pig on Codman Road. Codman Community Farms personnel were notified.

February 19

Todd Pond Road (11:15 a.m.) — A caller spoke to an officer regarding a real estate scam.

Todd Pond Road (11:56 a.m.) — A caller reported a leaking water main. The Water Department was notified.

Sandy Pond Road (4:06 p.m.) — Officers checked the area for a reported stolen motor vehicle but didn’t find it.

Sandy Pond Road (7:59 p.m.) — A second call about the stolen vehicle was received. Officers checked the area again with negative results.

February 20

Wells Road (7:40 a.m.) — An officer spoke to a caller regarding a dispute.

Wells Road (8:07 p.m.) — An officer assisted a resident with their television.

Wells Road (1:13 p.m.) — An officer served court paperwork.

Beaver Pond Road (3:38 p.m.) — A caller reported a strong outside odor of natural gas. National Grid was notified.

Minebrook Road (4:06 p.m.) — An officer made contact with a Lincoln resident on behalf of the Sudbury Police Department.

Old Cambridge Turnpike (5:04 p.m.) — A caller requested assistance while they retrieved personal items from a residence.

Old Concord Road (5:16 p.m.) — A caller reported potholes on Old Concord Road. The DPW was notified.

Birchwood Lane (10:21 p.m.) — A caller reported a possible Facebook scam.

February 21

North Great Road (3:32 p.m.) — An officer checked Route 2A for a possibly lost motorist but did not make contact.

Lincoln Woods (3:30 p.m.) — An officer spoke to a resident regarding an ongoing matter.

Wells Road (4:55 p.m.) — An officer performed a well-being check on a resident.

Page Road (5:13 p.m.) — A resident reported possible mail theft.

North Great Road (5:32 p.m.) — A motorist reported a strong odor of natural gas on Route 2A near Hanscom Drive. The Fire Department arrived on scene and asked that National Grid be notified.

Old County Road (6:07 p.m.) — A vehicle struck a utility pole which collapsed into the roadway, taking with it electrical and utility wires. There were no injuries as a result of the crash. Due to the age of the operator, no other information can be provided.

Old County Road (6:15 p.m.) — A second call was received regarding the motor vehicle crash.

February 22

Lincoln Library (11:36 a.m.) — Library staff called regarding a party who had previously been trespassed. Before the officer’s arrival, the party had left the library.

Round Hill Road (4:07 p.m.) — An individual spoke to an officer about being the victim of identity theft.

Old Sudbury Road (4:19 p.m.) — Officers responded for an accidental Lifeline medical alert activation.

Virginia Road (6:14 p.m.) — A caller asked to speak with an officer regarding Eversource cutting their power.

Lincoln Woods (5:15 a.m.) — The Lincoln Fire Department responded for a fire alarm activation caused by steam from a shower.

My Turn: Misconceptions about the Housing Choice Act

By Bob Domnitz

It’s distressing to see the continuing confusion about the HCA and the town’s response to the HCA. From my perspective as a former member of the Planning Board and Housing Choice Act Working Group, I will address two of the most common misconceptions.

Misconception #1: The HCA falls particularly hard on Lincoln.

— No, the HCA does not fall hard on Lincoln. We can easily comply.

Misconception #2: The HCA is complex…too complex for residents to understand.

— No, the law is not complex. Town leadership’s response to the law is complex. Near the beginning of presentations made by town leadership, the following principle is stated: Rezone near public transportation and town amenities.

This is a policy decision made by our town that goes far beyond the requirements of state law. State law only requires that our town locate 20% of the rezoning near public transportation. At a webinar held in early 2022 that town staff and I attended, the state agency that administers the HCA recognized that some towns would be unduly burdened by the new law. To illustrate their point, they showed a map of one town’s neighborhood around its commuter rail station. The town had significant wetlands, conservation land, and other land that was not developable. That town was Lincoln. In recognition of this undue burden, the guidelines issued by the state agency in August 2022 allowed towns to place some rezoning anywhere in town if they didn’t have much developable land near public transportation. Lincoln was one such town. Under the state agency’s guidelines, Lincoln was given flexibility to put 80% of its rezoning anywhere in town.

The complexity of the town’s response to the HCA is, in large part, a consequence of the town’s decision to disregard the flexibility given us by the state. There is no undue burden imposed upon us by the state. We have created the undue burden.

I’ve stated above that we can easily comply with the HCA. We need eight acres of land rezoned near the train station and 34 acres rezoned at a suitable location, anywhere in town. There are myriad combinations of land parcels that would meet the criteria. It’s not worth debating whether we should comply with the HCA. It’s not worth debating whether the state’s requirements fall harshly on Lincoln. It’s not worth debating whether the state has properly accounted for housing at Hanscom Air Force Base. We can comply. We should comply. We can easily comply.

A sound approach to the HCA would adopt a simple plan that achieves compliance. We would then be free to pursue our goals for affordable housing and mall redevelopment outside the formulaic, rigid constraints of the HCA. For example, we could choose to rezone Lewis Street, the mall, the south side of Lincoln Road, Codman Road, etc., with zoning decisions made by Town Meeting in the traditional manner, without the arbitrary constraints of the HCA. Importantly, we would be able to invoke the town’s inclusionary housing requirement to provide more affordable housing than the HCA allows.

I wish town leadership would trust residents to make these decisions. Instead, town leadership has chosen to combine three elements — HCA compliance, housing, and mall redevelopment — into one omnibus package. Because the package includes HCA compliance, it spreads the coercive urgency of the HCA’s deadline onto the other two elements of the package: housing and mall redevelopment. That’s what has led to the rush for action on the entire package. That’s what has led to the complexity of the package. Residents might have wanted to deal with housing and the mall separately from HCA compliance, but town leadership did not give us that option in December and we are not being given that option now.

The town’s initial decision to locate all rezoning at Lincoln Station, disregarding the flexibility given to us by the state, has led to the complex hodgepodge of subdistricts that we’ll be voting on in March. It may have been hard to foresee that we’d end up here as a result of the simple choice to put the entire HCA district at Lincoln Station. But sometimes, when you get to the end of a design process, you realize that initial decisions need to be re-examined. We are at such a time. We should rethink the initial decision to comply with the HCA by rezoning only near public transportation and town amenities.

Several years ago, the state changed the Zoning Act to allow a simple majority at town meetings to approve multifamily housing-related zoning amendments. Under prior law, these zoning amendments required a two-thirds supermajority vote for adoption. At our December 2023 Town Meeting, a scaled-down zoning plan was presented by a group of residents. Their plan got 37% of the vote, even though they were denied the opportunity to give a cohesive presentation. If that vote is replicated at our March Annual Town Meeting, leadership’s omnibus zoning package may pass as the least popular, most divisive zoning amendment in Lincoln’s history.

I urge town leadership to withdraw their plan and work with residents to craft a simpler plan that we can all support.

Bob Domnitz (Lincoln Planning Board, 2003-2015; 2020-2023 Housing Choice Act Working Group, 2022-2023)
bobdom333@hotmail.com

If any residents would like to discuss this with me, please send me a private email with your phone number and I’ll call you back as soon as I’m able.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Worries persist about HCA rezoning

The Planning Board will vote on the revised zoning bylaw on February 26, but residents still have questions, and its fate at the March 23 Town Meeting is far from certain.

Echoing a frequent thread in discussions about the HCA rezoning, attendees at the February 20 public hearing worried that a site plan review won’t be enough to control what gets built when multifamily and mixed-use developments are allowed by right in parts of South Lincoln under the new state-mandated rules. 

“Site plan review has teeth in that we can insist the development be done in a manner that is consistent with the neighborhood and the design guidelines, but you can’t use it to make it impossible for the developer to do something by right,” Planning Board Chair Margaret Olson said. Developers can be fined and/or denied an occupancy permit if they don’t comply, she added.

Traffic from commercial and residential units is also a concern that the board can’t control ahead of time. “We will look at traffic as there are projects,” Olson said. A traffic study and any resulting mitigation requirements “are a negotiation with the developer.”

“Then what can you say no to?” resident Barbara Peskin asked. The answer: essentially nothing. As an example, for a single-family home, “the town and board cannot deny your right to build a house on your property,” Olson said. Screening, lighting and other aspects can be controlled, “but we can’t tell you we don’t like your house… we cannot refuse a by-right use.”

Resident Susan Hall Mygatt urged the board to pass over the measure at Town Meeting and schedule a Special Town Meeting in June or the fall to give more time to come up with a better bylaw while still meeting the December 2024 state deadline. 

The board’s alleged failure to respond to resident comments “makes the public forums look like a sham, and will exacerbate the unhealthy tensions that are now evident between the board and the Selects on the one hand, and many residents who do not feel they have been heard,” said Mygatt, reading from a statement. “I and others are concerned that if the proposed amendment receives barely a 50% vote, there will continue to be significant ill will within the town and it will fester for years. This can be avoided.”

Along the same lines, board member Lynn DeLisi asked if there was any way to delay the board’s February 26 vote, but Olson said there wasn’t, since the board also has to approve design guidelines before Town Meeting.

“For better or for worse, we have to follow the direction given to us by Town Meeting” in December, when residents voted to go ahead with Option C to allow all of the new multifamily development within South Lincoln, Olson said. “If the town has changed its mind, the town will tell us no by voting no. I don’t think any of us should be upset by that prospect. If it’s not approved, that’s OK — that’s part of the process… absent considerably more public engagement that we have time for before March, we have what we have… we are in this bind.”

But resident Louis Zipes urged the board to go ahead with the March vote despite the controversy. “You’ve done an excellent job of adjusting to the town’s needs,” he said. “We recognize that not everyone will be satisfied. You have the support of a silent majority in the town.”

Hanscom developer offers plan details, answers questions

The Hanscom Field expansion area is outlined in red. Lincoln’s approximate town border to the south is indicated by the green dashed line.

North Airfield Ventures offered details of its plan to greatly enlarge hangar space at Hanscom Field to the Hanscom Field Advisory Commission on February 20. It was the first of several public sessions scheduled before developers file their environmental impact statement next month, according to a February 21 story in the Bedford Citizen.

While the parcel under consideration lies in the town of Bedford, an expansion of the airport’s capacity will increase air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions — an argument cited by opponents including Stop Private Jet Expansion as well as local and state officials including the Lincoln Select Board.

The project’s proponents say that additional hangar space will reduce the need for “ferry flights” to and from full Hanscom hangars to other storage areas, but the idea that “adding 90 football fields worth of space would reduce emissions from aircraft struck me as hard to believe,” Select Board member Jim Hutchinson said in February 2023.

Four 20,000-gallon jet fuel tanks and one 5,000-gallon tank for aviation gas are planned. Fuel deliveries are expected once or twice a day in 10,000-gallon tank trucks, the Bedford Citizen article notes. Although the plan has been scaled down from 27 to 17 hangars, the total size will remain at around 495,000 square feet, the article added.

The environmental review is not a permitting process. Under state law, once the impact report is submitted, there will be a 30-day comment period. If the content is not accepted by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, the developers must prepare a supplemental report, the Bedford Citizen explained in an earlier article.